|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's been my experience that not much (player-based) roleplaying (or what I would call good quality roleplaying) occurs during PFS sessions at conventions. Yes, most GMs roleplay, but what about players?
Before someone points out that their table / players are the exception, yes, you're going to have some odd tables / regions where there's lots of roleplay, but I haven't seen those players yet. During a convention, 7 tables, I'm lucky if I run into one awesome non-GM roleplayer, who actually tries.
Anyway, I there is a low amount of PFS roleplay for a number of reasons:
1) Strangers: I think it's uncomfortable to roleplay with strangers, compared to the comfort of your home/store with friends.
2) Time limitations: A lot of people say PFS time limitations limit the amount of roleplaying. I agree when it comes to self-indulgent frivolous roleplay/banter, but how does it take more time when you respond (to an in-game question) in a different voice/manner than your own? How does it take more time if you make decisions based on your PC, not yourself? I don't think it does.
3) Metagaming: Sometimes, it's really hard to perform actions that are obviously harmful to yourself or your team, if it's something the PC would do but you the player, would not. It's really hard to determine whether one bad action could lead to a TPK, sometimes it doesn't take much.
4) Combat orientated scenarios: Lots of the scenarios are combat orientated, not roleplay orientated, and/or most of the roleplay can be solved through simple skill checks (and GMs don't require their players to speak).
5) GMs: A lot of GMs expect you to be able to speak as well as your PC, so when you do speak at conventions, it's more likely a GM will slap a negative modifier on your roll than a positive modifier (or not allowing a roll at all!), further reducing the desire to roleplay. Only rarely have I seen a positive (roleplay) modifier applied to a PC. It's much easier to say "Bluff!" and roll, than actually saying something and have your GM not like your response, but it's not as fun. It's a lot safer just rolling if you have the skill.
6) Other Players: Not everyone likes to roleplay. At my last convention, there was some time to kill before the session started, so I started to roleplay with another player. It was just starting to get funny / good, when another player said "Hey guys, can you stop that, you're starting to freak me out.". Nice guy, likeable guy, but he didn't like roleplaying. Of course, that totally broke emersion and I never did roleplaying on that level again in the session. That's not the first time that's happenned (and no I'm not a freak). This is probably what prompted me to write this thread.
Those are my observations, what are yours? Do you agree or is your Gencon and convention experience totally different than mine?
Gencon GMs, how much roleplaying do your players do? This is obviously very subjective (and probably depends on how much roleplaying YOU like to do) but I'd like to know.
Also, I have a few questions for those who like to roleplay:
1) Do you consider part of roleplaying:
A) Using a different voice or mannerism compared to normal?
B) Sometimes making non-optimal (bad) decisions based on "what your PC would do" (or his limitations, like 7 Int)?
2) Do you find you roleplay less at conventions compared to home play? If so, why?
3) How do you think we can improve the level of roleplay at home games? Should players who don't roleplay just be left alone?
4) How do you think we can improve the level of roleplay at conventions? Or should we just leave the roleplaying to the GM, if he even does that?
Thanks for your responses. Oh, and Take 10, evil PCs, Paladins, 7 player tables, Animal Handling, and of course Play Play Play. :)
You forgot "AM BARBARIAN"!!
My first PFS character I find hard to roleplay because when I made him, I knew little about Golarion and the factions, and when I learned more, it ran a little counter to what I was expecting for his personality. Now it's just easier to have changed what I expect him to be to fit what's already on paper (Taldan, now Silver Crusade cleric of Iomedae).
My second PFS character is neck-deep in Golarion lore (Ulfen fighter/bard Ulfen Guard/Taldan faction), but A) my scandanavian accent is god-awful and B) his int is 8, making it hard for me to accurately determine what a dim bulb, but battle savy and steeped in lore/random trivia knowledge can do without obviously metagaming.
But you are right, time crunch at cons make it harder, but good roleplay DMs make even normally tacit "roll-players" get into the story. Seen it in person, loved every minute of it.
|
|
Stuff
I believe you can roleplay! However, I don't want the thread to be derailed by examples of how we roleplay at conventions, I'd rather we talk about the other players, the rest of the table.
And if you could answer my questions that would be awesome too. For example, I guess you have no problems roleplaying 100% at conventions compared to home games?
I guess you've never run into any players such as my example in #6?
I guess you never let metagaming interfere with your PCs actions?
And I guess your solution for better roleplay at conventions is to roleplay well yourself and have a good GM? So does that mean all of your tables at Gencon feature heavy roleplay?
|
Anyway, I there is a low amount of PFS roleplay for a number of reasons:
<snip>
Those are my observations, what are yours? Do you agree or is your Gencon and convention experience totally different than mine?
Totally agree that PFS is a difficult environment to roleplay within.
In addition to the factors above, add the following:
7) Lots of new PFS players who may not (yet) be roleplayers. It takes time for them to learn how to (and what it means to) roleplay.
8) Many differing opinions on what it means to roleplay. (I've added my thoughts in my next post). Some people think that just playing Diablo is roleplaying ("Look, I'm an archer!"). Others laugh at RPGs because they aren't LARP (or whatever). Roleplaying comprises a gamut of notions from people.
Also, I have a few questions for those who like to roleplay:
1) Do you consider part of roleplaying:
A) Using a different voice or mannerism compared to normal?
B) Sometimes making non-optimal (bad) decisions based on "what your PC would do" (or his limitations, like 7 Int)?2) Do you find you roleplay less at conventions compared to home play? If so, why?
3) How do you think we can improve the level of roleplay at home games? Should players who don't roleplay just be left alone?
4) How do you think we can improve the level of roleplay at conventions? Or should we just leave the roleplaying to the GM, if he even does that?
This is tough. Roleplaying is an advanced skill within PFS. I've added my thoughts from another post in another Paizo thread about how to roleplay below. Take it as you wish...or ignore.
Getting back to this post:
1) See below.
2) I find the roleplaying to be less at conventions at the low tier tables, but more at the high tier tables. Could that be because the low tables at conventions are more newer players? Probably :). And then at higher tiers, more experienced players have a better sense of the game and their characters and roleplay more.
3) I think it is up to the local coordinator of the home (or public) game to manage how much roleplaying they want in their games. Obviously, there is no PFS standard for amount of roleplay. Local coordinators should manage what is best for their groups. Players in those groups can either adapt to that or create their own game with more/less roleplaying.
There should be a nice shared balance between roleplayers at the table and not...with a bit more emphasis towards roleplaying than not, imho. As a GM, I'd happily cut out a combat in a scenario if the table was interested and having fun roleplaying through things.
4) Tough question: I try to lead by example and train my players when I can. (I'm *still* very much learning to be a good roleplayer and teacher within PFS...this is all an ongoing process for me. I have dreams of competence at both.) Not sure what a Local Coordinator can do except lead by example and push/defend roleplaying as an integral part of the game (though one that no everyone shares).
As a player, I try to take responsibility for my roleplaying and creating an environment for others to roleplay. (Again, see the post below.)
-Pain
|
|
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is a topic that is up on another recent Paizo Forum.
For PFS, all of the below should be taken in understanding that time is almost always a issue for Society mods. Many times people don't roleplay to save time and often take metagame short cuts against roleplaying to save time. I don't have a problem with that...but try to avoid it.
There are lots more good comments there that apply to what Jason S is asking above. Here is my contribution to that thread, tailored a bit for PFS, and edited for some clarity:
* * *
Roleplaying in PFS is not easy. Nonetheless, here are some things that I believe to my very core about how to roleplay well in Society Play.
#1: Character over Class: I believe that character comes before class and 'role'...and it's not even close. It's how your interpret how your character would do or react to situations and stimuli that is important to me: not your class or what others think you should do.
Nothing makes me sadder than a guy sitting down at the table thinking "I'm a fighter so I need to X, Y, or Z." Or someone who introduces themselves as "I'm an cleric." They truly don't get it...they aren't roleplaying. They are moving a joystick for paper version of the game Gauntlet. Roleplaying is having a character with motivations, feelings, quirks, styles, and whatever else...it's not about being a 'fighter'.
I want to play with characters who's class and build I *NEVER* know...but who's motivations and actions are a part of a larger being with feelings and emotions. I want to know their character, not their build.
Roleplaying is about putting the expectations of others behind and concentrating solely on the character that you want to play and then weaving that vision into the game. Roleplaying is not about talking in a funny voice or having a perfect mini for your character but about how you interact with others *as* your character.
#2: Real Motivation: Having 'real' motivation for your character is important. Truly important....as important as anything. An answer to the question: "Why are you here risking your life?" I want to play with characters who truly believe that they need to save the Princess/World/McGuffin because they have real motivations for wanting to do so...and they should be interesting and relevant.
For example:
Thorne, the most powerful Mage in *all* Absalom was motivated to prove himself as the most powerful mage in *all* Absalom and traveled with the Society to learn more and grow in power. (He failed miserably on all accounts, but was fun to play.)
#3: It's a Social?Team Game: Pathfinder is a social group game and that, by definition, means that roleplaying cannot be solo or an isolated endeavor. Within your playing good roleplayers will find ways to include others or give other players options and opening for interaction. Great roleplayers create these connections and allows and encourages others to shine and do fun and cool stuff.
If you've built a character that is overpowered for your group, unduly shines and excludes others, or one that is designed to cause problems for your GM? You've failed to be a good player.
This isn't about roleplay vs. minmax. It's about forgetting the social nature of the game altogether. Roleplayed or not, MinMaxed or not, any character that doesn't have options for interactions and sharing the spotlight with others (including and especially the GM), is a bad one.
This is a social game and that needs to be honored with every character and in every build.
#4: Perfection sucks: Don't ever play or build perfect characters: they are boring. Build characters that are 'broken' and 'imperfect'...that have real flaws and inabilities. Great roleplayers aren't afraid of imperfections: but rejoice and revel in them.
Give yourself room to grow and improve over the life of your character. If you roleplay your character as perfect, how are you going to grow and change over time? How are you going to mature? Where will you go from there?
The more flaws and pieces of interest you give a character, the more chances your teammates and GM will have to hook onto, interact with, and find areas of growth. Conflict, especially good-natured conflict, adds interest and tension.
By not being perfect, you allow for those situations to exist. Build them in as you think about your character. Your group will find room for humor and fun therein, conflict and decisions: stuff that makes campaigns great.
#5: Roleplay over rules. Roleplay first, rules second. Every time. Rules considerations second to the concept of what your character would do/wants to do. Figure out first how and why your character would be doing something...then work on the rules to make it happen.
#6: Separation of IC vs OOC. I believe that there is a separation in game terms between In-Character and Out-of-Character knowledge. Roleplaying is about separating game terms from your in-character actions.
For example: In character, your characters have no idea what differentiates a 'paladin' from a 'cleric' from a 'holy warrior'. There is no such thing as "Divine Grace" to the average person in Golarion. There is only that some holy warriors seem to resist spells well. Or that a particular holy warrior can almost smell evil.
My characters would never call someone a 'paladin' or 'druid'...for those are likely to be out-of-game terms. But 'holy warrior' and 'treehugger' might be more appropriate.
For example #2: In our world, there is something called a "Barbarian"...it's a class with rage, fast movement and whatever else. In the game world, "Barbarian" means nothing. The word "barbarian" (small 'b', referring to someone who is 'barbaric or uncivilized)can mean any sort of uncouth fighting type who might use any sort of weapon or combat style.
#7: Trust/No Fear: Roleplaying doesn't work if your players don't trust you...and you don't trust your fellow players. A *huge* part of roleplaying is trusting your fellow players to respond in kind, not take in-character things too seriously, and understand this is a game.
Trust:
Trust your GM to play along and not (unfairly) penalize you for roleplaying.
Trust your fellow players to play along with you.
Give *your* trust to your fellow players and create an environment for roleplaying.
Part of me believes that overcoming fear of failure is essential to roleplaying. I, personally, would rather fail in my task/mission than fail to act in character. I have to trust that things will work out in the end...and if my character would do X (within reason), he should probably do it and rejoice the earned outcome rather than metagame towards what will earn his 'reward'.
* * *
For when your group is playing their characters together: therein lies to the path to Roleplay Nirvana. I don't get there often enough, but I can try to be a better roleplayer to get there more often.
More great commentary HERE. Go read the fabulous ideas from others there.
-Pain
|
|
1) Do you consider part of roleplaying:
A) Using a different voice or mannerism compared to normal?
B) Sometimes making non-optimal (bad) decisions based on "what your PC would do" (or his limitations, like 7 Int)?
Definitely the former. Some of my characters have accents (or, in the case of my half-orc monk, I pitch my voice lower, and try to talk like Michael Dorn as Worf). It's also a matter of choice of words, and overall personality -- my "pirate" rogue acts a lot differently than her twin sister, the paladin of Iomedae.
The latter, occasionally, though I have a hard time making truly *bad* in-game decisions because "it's what the character would do", particularly in an OP setting. That said, having the guy with a low Wis do something really boneheaded can be fun from time to time. :-)
2) Do you find you roleplay less at conventions compared to home play? If so, why?
Yes. Part of it is undoubtedly comfort level (though I'm pretty shameless, and willing to ham it up in front of strangers). But, in a home game, I do know more about what boundaries I can and can't pass with my fellow players, and often, our characters will have shared histories, which feed into better / deeper roleplaying.
3) How do you think we can improve the level of roleplay at home games? Should players who don't roleplay just be left alone?
In home games, I suspect that players (over the long term) gravitate towards other players / groups which share their preference for depth of roleplaying. I've always preferred groups which got more into roleplay, and tended to drift away from those groups where the players preferred to not get into the depths of roleplaying.
At a certain level, I suspect that the adage about leading a horse to water applies.
4) How do you think we can improve the level of roleplay at conventions? Or should we just leave the roleplaying to the GM, if he even does that?
In this case, I do think that there's a potential to lead by example, especially if you're encountering a lot of players who are new to RPGs in general (or, possibly, experienced players who have never played with strong roleplayers, and haven't experienced that kind of game. I think that you can provide those examples as a GM, or as a fellow player. But, if you find yourself sitting next to another long-time player who just doesn't "get into character", don't force the issue.
|
One caveat to Painlord's #4: Perfection Sucks. If played straight, the Mr. Perfect Paladin, Do-Gooder and Chief Damsel Rescuer can be quite fun (don't mess with others roleplay, be the straight man, the character who doesn't get the jokes). Even more fun is the character who starts perfect, but slowly degenerates, gaining character flaws or nuerosis. My titular character started off as Pure Lawful. However, now if you do something that threatens society as a whole, he goes completely off the rails and acts completely irrationally.
TLDR: Make a character with motivations, don't be afraid for your character's personality to change as time goes on.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
5) GMs: A lot of GMs expect you to be able to speak as well as your PC, so when you do speak at conventions, it's more likely a GM will slap a negative modifier on your roll than a positive modifier (or not allowing a roll at all!), further reducing the desire to roleplay. Only rarely have I seen a positive (roleplay) modifier applied to a PC. It's much easier to say "Bluff!" and roll, than actually saying something and have your GM not like your response, but it's not as fun. It's a lot safer just rolling if you have the skill.
Sore spot.
Do those same GMs expect you to be as strong as your character? Do they make you get up and show how well your character uses his Acrobatics? Do they make you cast a Fireball in the next room before they let your character?
DMs who refuse to let you use the skills on your sheet because they aren't impressed by your abilities as a real, live person are throwing out the rules as written. In PFS, this is cheating. It also works both ways. If you have a charismatic player, his CHA 7 monk shouldn't be talking circles around all the NPCs. The GM is well within his rights to call for a Diplomacy check, which the PC is likely to fail.
[/rant]
|
|
One caveat to Painlord's #4: Perfection Sucks. <snip>
TLDR: Make a character with motivations, don't be afraid for your character's personality to change as time goes on.
Excellent amendment, Mr. Damocles. No objection offered. Amendment passes.
It could be better stated to plan for or expect 'change over time or via experience' when you think about your character.
-Pain
|
1) Do you consider part of roleplaying:
A) Using a different voice or mannerism compared to normal?
B) Sometimes making non-optimal (bad) decisions based on "what your PC would do" (or his limitations, like 7 Int)?
A)I do a voice with a few characters, but not all. I dont think it's entirely necessary for each character, unless that's just how you want to do it. However, I do try to alter the speak pattern I use a bit, again depending on the character. For example, my half-orc barbarian (Thokkjr, pronounced thockJur. Yes, one word.) has an Int of 10, but since he was raised by other orcs and half-orcs he talks like he has a 7 Int. It's his 'accent'.
Mannerisms are tricky though. I try to do some, from time to time, but have noticed that unless they are very overt or the GM is looking directly at you AND is familiar enough with you to know that you dont normally pick your nose/ make that face/ scratch yourself at the table/etc, it's probably going to go unnoticed by everyone else at the table. Makes it feel kinda pointless. :/
B) Again, I think it depends. Again regarding Thokkjr, he is fairly blunt (7 Cha), and if he beats your Bluff with his Sense Motive, he very may well snort, giggle, or otherwise give away your lie. However, we do have a rule in PFS that says 'Dont be a jerk', and I while it might be fun for me to roleplay my character the way I like to, I would do my best to not compromise someone's faction mission, or get the lie detected in a siuation where I think it might get us TPKed.
2) Do you find you roleplay less at conventions compared to home play? If so, why?
Yes, probably. You dont want to start out with some big huge roleplay moment (or maybe you do?) and steal the spotlight right out of the gate, so you start slow. By the time your comfortable, the session is halfway over, and you may never spend another session with those people. Rise, repeat.
3) How do you think we can improve the level of roleplay at home games? Should players who don't roleplay just be left alone?
There are many different reasons someone might be uncomfortable roleplaying, so 'should you leave them alone' is kind of a broad category. I think people who dont like to roleplay should be pushed to do so, but if they continually push back from it, then yea, leave them be.
To increase roleplay at home, I think part of it, as a GM, is to stand back and allow the players to lead the game. Have them interact in any and all possible situations. Dont let them go buy their gear at the shop, have the shopkeep talk to them. If the player is making a less optimal choice in gear buying, have the shopkeep suggest something better or more expensive. I dunno, just a thought.
4) How do you think we can improve the level of roleplay at conventions? Or should we just leave the roleplaying to the GM, if he even does that?
I admit, I'm not the best roleplayer, and in all honesty, I find it easier to do so as a player than as a GM, but it shouldnt be left to the GM to do it. I know I am more likely to get into the roleplaying of my character if I've got a GM who is roleplaying back to me.
This is a topic that is up on another recent Paizo Forum.
** spoiler omitted **
There are lots more good comments there that apply to what Jason S is asking above. Here is my contribution to that thread, tailored a bit for PFS, and edited for some clarity:
* * *
Roleplaying in PFS is not easy. Nonetheless, here are some things that I believe to my very core about how to roleplay well in Society Play.#1: Character over Class: I believe that character comes before class and 'role'...and it's not even close. It's how your interpret how your character would do or react to situations and stimuli that is important to me: not your class or what others think you should do.
Nothing makes me sadder than a guy sitting down at the table thinking "I'm a fighter so I need to X, Y, or Z." Or someone who introduces themselves as "I'm an cleric." They truly don't get it...they aren't roleplaying. They are moving a joystick for paper version of the game Gauntlet. Roleplaying is having a character with motivations, feelings, quirks, styles, and whatever else...it's not about being a 'fighter'.
I want to play with characters who's class and build I *NEVER* know...but who's motivations and actions are a part of a larger being with feelings and emotions. I want to know their character, not their build.
Roleplaying is about putting the expectations of others behind and concentrating solely on the character that you want to play and then weaving that vision into the game. Roleplaying is not about talking in a funny voice or having a perfect mini for your character but about how you interact with others *as* your character.
#2: Real...
This.
Painlord, man, you get it. These thoughts, and the silent ones that animate them, are what makes DnD be what it can and should be. Kudos on always fighting the good fight!
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This.
Painlord, man, you get it. These thoughts, and the silent ones that animate them, are what makes DnD be what it can and should be. Kudos on always fighting the good fight!
Thanks Elorebaen. I rock to your Triumph...the music makes your kind words better.
I'm not quite sure this is a 'fight' or a matter of opinion/preference/teaching though.
I know a lot of players prefer the crunch. I know many more prefer the roleplaying. I know some that just haven't been taught or exposed to the roleplaying side of PFS: maybe they are new players who have just never experienced it.
As you know, in my opinion, if you don't roleplay, you're just not a complete player. You're missing half the game.
I also believe that RP is more prevalent with more experienced players: they have the maturity, trust, confidence, and experience to work RP into their characters than new players (who tend to focus on crunch/combat/mechanics).
For example, this post from a new player sitting in at a very experienced table at our recent convention:
Watching a group of players who all know most of the rules by heart, so they can concentrate on having fun playing the characters, was an educational (and enjoyable) experience.
That table was pretty darn close to Roleplaying Nerdvana: 1 great RP GM (Azmyth) and 4 other great roleplayers who had great characters, 1 new player who was eager to learn about roleplaying (and after the game vowed to make a new yahoo immediately...one with character), and 1 min/maxer who is just not interested in RP and who will probably never "Get Found".
We had a great time. I want more of that. That's why I play the game. And I hope that we can create and promote an environment for that to happen both at conventions and home/store games.
-Pain
|
) Do you consider part of roleplaying:
A) Using a different voice or mannerism compared to normal?
-Yes, I consider it part of roleplay. Mind you at many convention tables there's no room to use different mannerisms. My voice has more than a bit of a monotone so its hard to modulate subtly, but i can do a good kobold or velociraptor.
B) Sometimes making non-optimal (bad) decisions based on "what your PC would do" (or his limitations, like 7 Int)?
-Yes, but I think you have to rein this in sometimes. Its funny when it gets the fighter knocked on the head a few times or the rogue a few extra rounds of "alone time" with the tentacled thing in the darkness, but when it causes someone to die or a TPK... not so much.
I think the key here is to think not "what would my character do" (one option) but "what MIGHT my character do", a list. Find something on it that won't get people killed.
2) Do you find you roleplay less at conventions compared to home play? If so, why?
-Yes, you don't know the other people, what their limits are, or how they're going to take an in character statement.. heck, i don't know if they know the difference between in and out of character.
3) How do you think we can improve the level of roleplay at home games? Should players who don't roleplay just be left alone?
Nope.
The best thing i've seen work is switching to a different system. Deadlands and 7th sea have rewards for role playing and personality flaws that give players a little more to work with for coming up with a personality and backstory.
4) How do you think we can improve the level of roleplay at conventions? Or should we just leave the roleplaying to the GM, if he even does that?
Dialog. Ask questions in character (something that couldn't possibly be to the player) Have the NPC's make one liners in battle and see if the PC's respond. Toss chocolate to players for Role playing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It often depends on the mod as well.
forex shades ice 1 & 2, you can more or less through the dice away and freeform huge parts of them
...and if you sit in a room with 5 tables of we be goblins going on, you can certainly hear the in-character stuff
|
|
1) Do you consider part of roleplaying:
A) Using a different voice or mannerism compared to normal? B) Sometimes making non-optimal (bad) decisions based on "what your PC would do" (or his limitations, like 7 Int)? If it fits the character I'm playing AND I trust the table I'm playing with not to snark, roll their eyes. then yes, I tend to make my choices based on what the character would do. I do tend to lessen it if I think it's likely to get everyone else killed. I'm there to have fun; pissing off other people isn't usually fun. And, I have had people make snide comments about an accent I've used or some choice I've made before. When that happens I find that not only am I less likely to do more at that table, but I'm also less likely to try again at another table.
2) Do you find you role play less at conventions compared to home play? If so, why? That depends. I was surprised last year at Paizocon just how much wonderful role playing I saw at most of my tables. It was often much more than I see at home games or local game days. I tend to role play more the more I'm around others that role play.
3a) How do you think we can improve the level of role play at home games? I'm not sure, honestly. Ideally by discussing with the people you play with that you'd like more of it. But I think everyone who comes to the table has a right to want to be comfortable and role playing makes some people very uncomfortable. At a home game, I'm ok with moving more toward the center because I think it's much easier for a role player to roll play than it is to teach a roll player to really get the other side. But if I have to move too far (I haven't yet) I think I'd forgo playing.
3b) Should players who don't role play just be left alone? Try to set an example, but meet them half way or better; trying to change someone that doesn't want to change has never been good for a relationship.
[b]4) How do you think we can improve the level of role play at conventions? Or should we just leave the role playing to the GM, if he even does that? Don't leave it to the GM. I love role playing but if I have a table of dice barons, then I'll minimize the role playing and focus on the parts they like. Give me a sign, any kind of sign. If the VC has a funny voice, give me something, anything back.
|
|
2) Do you find you role play less at conventions compared to home play? If so, why? That depends. I was surprised last year at Paizocon just how much wonderful role playing I saw at most of my tables. It was often much more than I see at home games or local game days. I tend to role play more the more I'm around others that role play.
Is that a complaint? I can up the intensity a notch. Maybe I'll start LARPing...
|
|
I agree with Pain Lord in that players who don't role play are missing half of the game.
As a GM I try to foster a table that is comfortable to role-playing. There are a lot of meta and power gamers out there that really try to snuff out the role-playing aspect and it is really up to the GM's to make sure that all voices at a table are heard and respected.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There are a lot of meta and power gamers out there that really try to snuff out the role-playing aspect
Okay, seriously?
Not powergamers who "aren't interested in the roleplaying aspect" or "aren't comfortable with roleplaying" or "are unfamiliar with the roleplaying experience", but "really try to snuff out the roleplaying"?
Really?
Maybe the powergamers would be more interested in learning to roleplay if the roleplayers weren't constantly villainizing them.
If I thought roleplayers couldn't tell the difference between someone who was different from them and someone who was trying to destroy what they loved, then I wouldn't want to be like them either.
|
|
Jiggy, negativity and snide comments towards roleplay go a long way to "snuffing out" roleplaying at a table. It takes someone with a strong sense of self (and not giving a crap what Mr Poopy Pants thinks), to ignore that.
I think people are just using easy-to-understand terms when they use the term powergamer. I've met people who could be considered both, they're not exclusive.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I think people are just using easy-to-understand terms when they use the term powergamer. I've met people who could be considered both, they're not exclusive.
This I understand, and have no qualms with the term "powergamer" (or "optimizer" or "min-maxer", for that matter).
My only issue was with the mindset that those who powergame and/or don't roleplay (I'm not even picky on which one he means) are out to get him.
Is it so hard to imagine that a lack of roleplay might be something other than an attack against it?
EDIT: Forgot to reply to the first part of your post. Yes, snide comments toward roleplaying can "snuff it out". It works the other way too, though: snide comments about powergamers/non-roleplayers (like the one to which I was responding) are also bad, yet no one seems to bat an eye at those.
|
|
The scenario I picture (and I have seen it happen from time to time) is something like this...
roleplayer: (tries to do some roleplaying with an NPC that isn't oriented toward solving a clear goal related to the "mission"...)
non-roleplayer: "we don't have time for this..." or "let's get past this enounter already..." or "this is boring, come on already..."
I don't think non-roleplayers ("power-gamer" or otherwise) are directly attacking the person but are saying things (or taking actions in character) that roleplayers believe short-circuit their attempts to roleplay.
I'm kind of in the middle myself. I like a fair amount of roleplaying in my game (as a player and as GM), but there is also the uber-roleplayer (aka "the thespian") who can get on my nerves... luckily, I rarely ever meet anyone like that. I am much more likely to encounter people who don't roleplay simply because they feel uncomfortable or it doesn't do a thing for them (personally). YMMV, but a GM will have to balance opportunities for roleplay for all players involved (not too much or too little)... they must listen to their players' wants.
WJ
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Yes, everyone will acknowledge (when pressed) that both the powergamer and the roleplayer can be the problem. But all that gets brought up is the problem powergamer (and such statements are accepted as casually as a statement that the sky is blue), and any dissention or mention of the reverse is more often than not met with the equivalent of "but they started it!".
Grates on my nerves a bit. Sorry if this is rant-ish.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Stolen and re-posted from the other thread:
Here are some few points which I think every great role-player should follow.
Enthusiasm: About the game, about your character, the setting, the plot and the other player's characters.
Immersion: In the setting, in your characters life, in the story. Avoid using meta game knowledge to get an advantage in the game and rather base his decisions on what is natural for his character.
Flexibility: Be flexible about your vision of your character to allow for changes which makes the character fit better into the setting and the group.
Solidarity: Willingness to share your enthusiasm with other players and not steal their thunder, but allow them to have their own place in the game, including the GM.
Growth: An ability to show how your character grows from his in-game experiences beyond new levels and abilities. Even better if he makes mechanical choices based on such experiences instead of what may be optimal from a mechanical point of view.
Characterization: Make an effort to have your character stand out by using a special voice or speech pattern, taking on minor mannerisms of your character or doing something special to make your character come alive (f.ex I once had a bard player who wrote song lyrics and poetry based upon the experiences the party had been through, and little things like finding a portrait of your character to show the other players.)
Motivation: Let fun be the motivation for gaming, not "winning" or having the most powerful character. Willingness to make in-game choices that are fun, but not necessarily optimal. making sure everyone else is having fun and stepping back if you feel your actions are somehow ruining the fun for one of the other players (including the GM).
+1.
-Pain
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
I admit, I have been told I'm a "meta-gamer" (for buying supplies in anticipation for traps and undead in a long-abandoned dungeon) and a "cheese-whiz". So, if this conflict has two sides, maybe you can tell which side I favor.
Despite all that, I have not seen a lot of what Jiggy cautions against: players disappointed in the combat-oriented players.
I have seen the reverse, people getting upset at the role-playing choices of people who make sub-optimal choices. And those criticisms have some merit. As a GM, I have sat and watched players deliberately take dangerous actions, because it's "in character" to insult a powerful NPC on behalf of the Pathfinders, or cause mischief, or just bull ahead through a dungeon, and I've let the chips fall accordingly. In those circumstances, at a PFS table, characters die, and that's not necessarily the instigating characters.
So my advice is (a) role-play as you feel comfortable, but (b) if you sit down at a table with strangers, expect that somebody may be a role-playing goofball that'll get the party killed. That's all part of the fun. Don't get too attached to your character.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
roleplayer: (tries to do some roleplaying with an NPC that isn't oriented toward solving a clear goal related to the "mission"...)
I wouldn't really want someone roleplaying with an NPC outside of the scope of the mission (I'm not sure there is time for that), that's a good example of hogging play time. I've never met a single person like this in PFS so far (although I know of people like this outside of PFS).
Yes, someone who just wants to do meaningless roleplay and hog the spotlight is a problem, but they are rare indeed.
This thread is about my observation that "in general", many players don't roleplay anymore, not even a little. Maybe they have a PC background (which isn't even portrayed in-game), but that's it. And some players even discourage roleplaying. I just find it strange and was wondering if people had similar experiences, and whether there was anything we could do about it.
I admit, I have been told I'm a "meta-gamer" (for buying supplies in anticipation for traps and undead in a long-abandoned dungeon) and a "cheese-whiz". So, if this conflict has two sides, maybe you can tell which side I favor.
There are no "sides" to my thread, mostly an observation and a question "How do we make it better?"
I have absolutely no problem with someone being prepared for a scenario with consumables and gear. I call that smart. This same player could also be the best (and most fun) roleplayer of the group, there is no correlation between these traits at all.
Fallacy: A powergamer can't also be the best roleplayer.
Despite all that, I have not seen a lot of what Jiggy cautions against: players disappointed in the combat-oriented players.
I've seen this before, we had a player with an ineffective PC b+#*$ about the party, but the truth was if we weren't good, we would have died. I felt bad for him though, the scenario was all combat, but that wasn't our fault and he had no right to complain about our role in the group.
Again, it was the scenarios fault with too much combat. This trend occurs again and again and again...
I have seen the reverse, people getting upset at the role-playing choices of people who make sub-optimal choices. And those criticisms have some merit.
I've seen this too, and it's really easy to forgive if they help with faction missions and you're successful in the scenario anyways. If you have a TPK or your PC dies, I'd probably be "annoyed" as well. If they helped with the rez bill, I'd be less annoyed.
Ineffective PC has nothing to do with roleplay. They're independent and two different topics. I've seen lots of ineffective PCs and the player still can't roleplay.
So my advice is (a) role-play as you feel comfortable, but (b) if you sit down at a table with strangers, expect that somebody may be a role-playing goofball that'll get the party killed.
Roleplaying doesn't mean ineffective PC builds!
Why do so many people think that roleplaying is about:
i) Making sub-optimal PC choices
ii) Making a PC background story
Who gives a f**#? Seriously. No one cares if you selected feat A or B, or whether your PC comes from a small town in Ustalav and was a farmer.
Show us (through storytelling), don't tell us (out of character)!
We care:
A) If the story is memorable.
B) If your PC is memorable.
C) If you made us laugh and have a good time.
Building a suboptimal PC or having a 5 page PC background doesn't help us with A, B, or C.
That's all part of the fun. Don't get too attached to your character.
Umm... dying isn't fun. And if you aren't attached at all to your PC, I consider that a problem too. If you aren't attached at all, your PC might as well be a pawn on a chessboard. That kind of defeats the purpose of us playing an RPG, you might as well be playing Risk. It's possible to be attached to your PC and be mature enough to handle your PC dying (which is going to suck no matter what).
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
On the subject of "Not enough time in the slot for roleplay!", I do believe there are ways GMs could speed up their game, without losing any actual content. Maybe even getting more content, as that 'optional encounter' doesn't have to be dropped, after all.
Things like; don't make the PCs roll 64 Perception checks, each, when searching a 40' room. If there's two things to be found, there's only two things to be found. Maybe even have the PCs' bonuses written down, so you can roll them in advance, then get the handouts ready for the successful players, for when they enter the room.
Skip long repetitive chores. I had a game where it took over an hour real time for everyone to climb up one wall, then down the other side. It could have gone;
"Can anyone beat DC 20 when taking 10?"
"Yes."
"You think this climb is tough for most people, but within your ability."
"I go up first, taking the rope with me. Tie it off up top, and drop it down."
"Can anyone fail a DC 5, don't forget your armor penalty?"
<All> "No"
"It takes you a few minutes to get up to where the first rope is tied."
"As soon as I see the rope is secure, I'll be off further up, taking the second rope."
"Okay; you repeat this, and you get to the top. Now you can see the way down. Going in the same order?"
<All> "Yes."
<break to deal with a trap, which the lead PC spotted>
"You believe it's all clear, and continue till you all get inside."
That would have taken probably five minutes. Plenty of time saved for RP purposes.
|
Venture-Captain, California—San Francisco Bay Area South & West
|
If you sit down at a table with strangers, expect that somebody may be a role-playing goofball that'll get the party killed. That's all part of the fun. Don't get too attached to your character.
I suppose that's fine if you think your character is nothing but a set of numbers. But if you've invested hours coming up with a real character, with back-story, motivations, etc., and growing that character over time, it's only natural that you'll have an attachment to that character. So, sure, it's not going to be a lot of fun if somebody at the table ignores the "Don't be a jerk" directive and gets some (or all) of your party killed - it trivialises that investment.
I really don't understand how anyone can think that's all part of the fun. This is a problem caused by a jerk, assisted by the GM in colluding with the jerk and allowing them to spoil the experience for the others at the table. Perhaps you should take another look at the "Guide to Organized Play":
The goal of Pathfinder Society Organized Play is to provide an enjoyable experience for as many players as possible. Player-versus-player conflict only sours a session. While killing another character might seem like fun to you, it certainly won’t be for that character’s player.
and, later:
As a Pathfinder Society GM, you have the right and responsibility to make whatever calls you feel are necessary at your table to ensure that everyone has a fair and fun experience.
(emphasis mine).
|
|
In my experience the biggest constraints to roleplaying at a convention are time. Usually there is a 4-5 hour slot, often the session starts 10-15 minutes late and GMs are often running in an unfamiliar setting. Hyper organized GMs or GMs who run at conventions a lot have less issues, but even then late players hurt.
The other biggie is the noise level, which is often much louder than I encounter in a shop. I have a lot of issues with hearing when there is a lot of gray noise and convention play makes it a challenge sometimes just to follow along with the session.
There are also rude players of various sorts, it's hard to target one specific *type* of rude player who is the worst. I've seen people monopolize a table with role-play as often as I've seen power gamers who steal the scene so I'm not going to point fingers at any specific group beyond saying Rude People.
Overall... I find the people the least challenging part though, the noise and the timing usually are bigger problems.
I enjoy roleplaying, but I also enjoy finishing the adventure.
Convention and game store play often has a fixed time limit.
.
The GM is the one who knows if the players are on time
or at risk of going over. Therefore, it is GM responsibility
to ensure that the players have the opportunity to finish.
The GM can also expand the scenario to fill available time.
Things like the optional encounter can provide flexibility.
This sometimes means less roleplay, sometimes more roleplay.
|
|
I admit, I have been told I'm a "meta-gamer" (for buying supplies in anticipation for traps and undead in a long-abandoned dungeon) and a "cheese-whiz". So, if this conflict has two sides, maybe you can tell which side I favor.
That's odd.
In a world where undead are known to exist, and traps (and other problems) are a very common hazard when spelunking in abandoned underground facilities-- equipping yourself with gear to handle such issues seems like it's very sensible (in character), not an example of 'metagaming'.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I admit, I have been told I'm a "meta-gamer" (for buying supplies in anticipation for traps and undead in a long-abandoned dungeon) and a "cheese-whiz". So, if this conflict has two sides, maybe you can tell which side I favor.
That's odd.
In a world where undead are known to exist, and traps (and other problems) are a very common hazard when spelunking in abandoned underground facilities-- equipping yourself with gear to handle such issues seems like it's very sensible (in character), not an example of 'metagaming'.
Not only that, but in the setting of Pathfinder Society, each character has already gone through years of Pathfinder training. Even the dummies (low INT/WIS) should have had certain precautionary measures beaten into them in order to just graduate into being full-fledged Pathfinders.
Time to make a "Real roleplayers mind their setting" T-shirt and point out this fact to those who would get me killed in the interest of "roleplaying".
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In a world where undead are known to exist, and traps (and other problems) are a very common hazard when spelunking in abandoned underground facilities-- equipping yourself with gear to handle such issues seems like it's very sensible (in character), not an example of 'metagaming'.
We had a 2nd Edition game once, where the GM wouldn't say what he was running, but it was quite clear, from discussions he was having with other GMs, he was itching to use the Ravenloft setting.
He asked everyone to make up generic, realistic, 'European'-style PCs, and equip them for a long caravan trip.
One player declared he was a travelling French chef, working the chuck wagon, and setting up his stall at every town. He was commended for making such a normal, everyday PC, unlike others, who had tried to sneak in an undead-bane sword. vials of holy water, and other stuff we should have no reason to bring.
Well, at the first sign of trouble, what does he do, but dive into his wagon, come out throwing everyone a wooden 'tent peg', knives from the 'best silver cutlery set', and crack open the crate of garlic....
How we laughed.